Format

Send to

Choose Destination

See 1 citation found by title matching your search:

J Neuroinflammation. 2017 Aug 29;14(1):171. doi: 10.1186/s12974-017-0929-z.

Pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS: evidence from cerebrospinal fluid analysis.

Author information

1
Molecular Neuroimmunology Group, Department of Neurology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. sven.jarius@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
2
Department of Neuropathology, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
3
Department of Neurology, Charité University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
4
NeuroCure Clinical Research Center and Clinical and Experimental Multiple Sclerosis Research Center, Berlin, Germany.
5
Department of Neuropathology, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. wbrueck@med.uni-goettingen.de.
6
Molecular Neuroimmunology Group, Department of Neurology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) is currently based solely on clinical and magnetic resonance imaging features. However, histopathological studies have revealed four different patterns of lesion pathology in patients diagnosed with MS, suggesting that MS may be a pathologically heterogeneous syndrome rather than a single disease entity.

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this study was to investigate whether patients with pattern I MS differ from patients with pattern II or III MS with regard to cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) findings, especially with reference to intrathecal IgG synthesis, which is found in most patients with MS but is frequently missing in MS mimics such as aquaporin-4-IgG-positive neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders and myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein-IgG-positive encephalomyelitis.

METHODS:

Findings from 68 lumbar punctures in patients who underwent brain biopsy as part of their diagnostic work-up and who could be unequivocally classified as having pattern I, pattern II or pattern III MS were analysed retrospectively.

RESULTS:

Oligoclonal bands (OCBs) were present in 88.2% of samples from pattern I MS patients but in only 27% of samples from patients with pattern II or pattern III MS (P < 0.00004); moreover, OCBs were present only transiently in some of the latter patients. A polyspecific intrathecal IgG response to measles, rubella and/or varicella zoster virus (so-called MRZ reaction) was previously reported in 60-80% of MS patients, but was absent in all pattern II or III MS patients tested (P < 0.00001 vs. previous cohorts). In contrast, the albumin CSF/serum ratio (QAlb), a marker of blood-CSF barrier function, was more frequently elevated in samples from pattern II and III MS patients (P < 0.002). Accordingly, QAlb values and albumin and total protein levels were higher in pattern II and III MS samples than in pattern I MS samples (P < 0.005, P < 0.009 and P < 0.006, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS:

Patients with pattern II or pattern III MS differ significantly from patients with pattern I MS as well as from previous, histologically non-classified MS cohorts with regard to both intrathecal IgG synthesis and blood-CSF barrier function. Our findings strongly corroborate the notion that pattern II and pattern III MS are entities distinct from pattern I MS.

KEYWORDS:

Blood-CSF barrier dysfunction; Cerebrospinal fluid; Histopathology; Intrathecal IgG synthesis; Multiple sclerosis; Oligoclonal bands; Pattern I lesions; Pattern II lesions; Pattern III lesions; QAlb; QIgG; Total protein

PMID:
28851393
PMCID:
PMC5576197
DOI:
10.1186/s12974-017-0929-z
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center